Kingswood Senior Living

Name: Kingswood Senior Living
Address: 10000 WORNALL ROAD, Kansas City, MO, 64114, US
Telephone: 8169420994

10000 Wornall Road, Kansas City, MO 64114 · Jackson County · 86 certified beds · avg 46 residents/day · certified since Apr 1, 2005

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

$14,069

Fines, last 3 years

4.63

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 5, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Feb 26, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

All citations in the current public record (38)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Jun 18, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jun 18, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Jun 18, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have enough fresh-air ventilation, whether through windows, mechanical systems, or both.
May 22, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint
Mar 5, 2025	▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jan 22, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Jan 22, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint
Jan 22, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint
Jan 22, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · from a complaint
Sep 29, 2023	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 29, 2023	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Sep 29, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Sep 29, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Sep 29, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not properly protect the personal money residents deposited with it for safekeeping.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have a policy covering how food brought in by family and visitors is used and stored safely.
Sep 29, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Apr 22, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Apr 22, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Apr 22, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Apr 22, 2022	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 22, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Apr 22, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
Apr 22, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Apr 22, 2022	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 8).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2022	8	0	E
2023	16	0	F
2025	14	1	J ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

1 fine totaling $14,069.

Date	Type	Amount / length
Jan 22, 2025	Fine	$14,069

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

Measure	This facility	Missouri avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	4.63	3.66	3.95	top 16% in Missouri; top 20% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.58	0.49	0.69	top 26% in Missouri; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	4.34	3.22	3.50	top 10% in Missouri; top 15% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.30	0.33	0.48	top 42% in Missouri; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	55.2	56.0	45.8	top 46% in Missouri; bottom 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	50.0	47.8	42.9	top 46% in Missouri; bottom 39% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.03, RN 0.51, weekend 3.78. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Other

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
		Ownership Data Not Available

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
"How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
"How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
"How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
"Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Ignite Medical Resort Carondelet LLC	0.9 mi	Kansas City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	2/5
Hilltop at Blue River, the	2.1 mi	Kansas City, MO	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Hope Care Center	2.1 mi	Kansas City, MO	★★★★★	4/5
Bridgewood Health Care Center	2.2 mi	Kansas City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuseSFF
Armour Oaks Senior Living Community	2.4 mi	Kansas City, MO	★★☆☆☆	3/5
Advanced Health Care of Overland Park	2.5 mi	Overland Park, KS	★★★★★	3/5
Rehab of Kansas City South	2.5 mi	Kansas City, MO	★☆☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Overland Park Post Acute	2.7 mi	Overland Park, KS	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Claridge Court	3.0 mi	Prairie Village, KS	★★★★★	5/5
Swan Health at Overland Park	3.5 mi	Overland Park, KS	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Village Shalom INC	4.0 mi	Overland Park, KS	★★★★☆	2/5
Highland Rehabilitation & Health Care Center	4.1 mi	Kansas City, MO	★★★☆☆	2/5	abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Kansas City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 265795.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Kingswood Senior Living

10000 Wornall Road, Kansas City, MO 64114 · 8169420994

Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 3/5· Fines (3y): $14,069

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Mar 5, 2025 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, one-off): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
☐ "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
☐ "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
☐ "How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
☐ "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 265795 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)